Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal

Welcome to the main talk page for the Scratch Wiki!

Shortcuts: SWT:CP S:CPORTAL S:CPTALK S:PORTAL S:PORTTALK S:CP We recommend that before you ask a question, you search the archives first to make sure it has not been answered before:   Archives (oldest first) 1 • 2 • 3 • 4 • 5 • 6 • 7 • 8 • 9 • 10 11 • 12 • 13 • 14 • 15 • 16 • 17 • 18 • 19 • 20 21 • 22 • 23 • 24 • 25 • 26 • 27 • 28 • 29 • 30 31 • 32 • 33 • 34 • 35 • 36 • 37 • 38 • 39 • 40 41 • 42 • 43 • 44 • 45 • 46 • 47 • 48 • 49 • 50 51 • 52 • 53 • 54 • 55 • 56 • 57 • 58 • 59 • 60 61 • 62 • 63 • 64 • 65 • 66 • 67 • 68 • 69 • 70 71 • 72 • 73 • 74 • 75 • 76 • 77 • 78 • 79 • 80 81 • 82 • 83 • 84 • 85 • 86 • 87 • 88 • 89 • 90 91 • 92 • 93 • 94 • 95 • 96 • 97 • 98 • 99 If you do not think a discussion is done, you can move it to Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal/Not Done. Size of Community Portal: 116,081 bytes. Click the button below to leave a message! Make sure it has a descriptive title so people can see what you're talking about in a glance.

How to edit on the Scratch Wiki

We recommend that before you create your question, you read these tips to editing on the Scratch Wiki. Sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~) after your post. To do various text formatting, follow the following rules, rather than using any other text-editing methods: Make text bold with '''text'''. Make text italics with ''text''. Make text bold and italics with '''''text'''''. Make a link to a page outside of this wiki with [http://www.example.com link text] or {{plain link|1=http://www.example.com|2=link text}} if you don't want the symbol to appear (remember http:// prefix). Make a link to an article on this wiki with [[Page name]] or [[Page name|Link text]]. Make a link to a Wikipedia article with [[Wikipedia:Page name]] or [[Wikipedia:Page name|Link text]]. Indent a paragraph by putting a colon (:) before it. For more, see the help page on formatting. Put new text under old text. Always remember to be polite and respectful, assume good faith, and be welcoming, while following the Scratch Community Guidelines.

Bulletin Board for Not-Done Topics

Not done (this will never be done completely, so don't archive!)

Threads that need "long time and hard work" will not be archived, but moved to S:CPND.

Here's some things that we need your help for.

Are these done?

• S:CPND#Lack of curiosity at Scratch Wiki? - articles are made
• S:CPND#Should "Griffpatch" become a wiki article? - seems rejected

Other Topics

Topics that are not listed above.

About Scratch 3.0

• S:CPND#A Thorough Discussion on Thinking of the Past, Present, Future, and Organizing them All
• S:CPND#3.0 updating
• S:CPND#What should we call the Scratch 3.0 player?

About Wiki Management

Backend

• S:CPND#Mobile Device Skin & Responsive Design for Scratch-Wikis ?
• S:CPND#Embedding of Scratch Projects
• S:CPND#Things We have to Do

Rules

• S:CPND#custom signatures
• S:CPND#We have to delete Fair Use

Interwiki

• S:CPND#We need your help: Apply for getting "International Scratch Wiki Coach"
• S:CPND#Why is Interwiki not possible in the english community-portal?

To make sure that your thread will not be archived put the template Not done at the top.

Don't forget to replace it with the Done template when the thread is finally finished.

Apple502j Talk/Activities 1,690edit 11:09, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

(I have edited this topic a little from its original version)
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  08:16, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Help:Contents Is missing some help pages

Not done
There are a few help pages which aren't in Help:Contents, for some reason.
We need to fix that.
Yzyzyz (talk | contribs) 14:07, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

+1 It's a contents page, it should have contents to all help pages. If you see a contents page in a book, it tells you where every chapter is.
290Scratcher (talk | contribs) 15:29, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

bump
Yzyzyz (talk | contribs) 14:34, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

I think some of the articles in the Help namespace actually don't belong in Help:Contents. They should be linked to from other help pages instead.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  10:51, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Block Lag on Chrome (revived)

Not done

I was scrolling through Encoding and Decoding Cloud Data recently, and I found that scrolling past scratchblocks is soooo laggy. This reminded me of a now archived discussion mentioning this... so now I want to bring it back up.

Does anyone else (besides Turkey3) have issues with this? It seems to specifically be a Chrome issue.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  05:00, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

I don't, It is definitely a chrome issue, I use Firefox and I'm not experiencing any lag on pages. If you can download another workable browser, that's what I'd recommend. If its a Chrome issue, It'll properly not be resolved.
Purplewolves (talk | contribs) 06:53, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Me.
Cυƨтσмнαcκεя ( тαʟκ | cσптяıв ) 10:34, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Just as Purplewolves said, it is definitely a Chrome problem. I am using a Chromebook, and scrolling through that page normally lags it, or dragging the little bar at the side. I have found that using the arrow keys doesn't make the computer lag as much. --
Phantomsrule4life (talk | contribs) 00:16, 3 March 2018 (CET)

With Safrai on iPhone I can't even browse that article: scrolling down leads to a permanent rendering error. Like some other articles. Like mentioned and discussed with kenny2scratch monthe ago. The Blocksplugin sometimes seems to cause to rendering errors, that some browsers can handle, some need more rendering time and some can't
 MartinWollenweber  Talk  Contribs  Directory  16:12, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

On MS Edge, this doesn't seem to be a problem. I feel no lag on Edge and there is no crash. Chrome remains laggy. Could someone with Firefox or Opera test out that page too?
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  08:04, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

I could've done it on my school's computer today! drat. Will you mind waiting 2 months?
NYCDOT [ Talk Page | Contributions | Directory ] 02:01, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ I use Chrome all the time and I've never had any problems with that.
CrazyBoy826 (talk | contribs) 18:48, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

I recently started to have lag, but it is minor and only delays for fractions of a second.
CrazyBoy826 | Talk | Contribs | Scratch account | More... 17:08, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Fractions of a second is a lot compared to normal completely-smooth scrolling! So you do have this issue as well.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  03:15, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

Suggestion: a dedicated page for requests for admin/EW action; idea: subpages for each topic instead of sections

Please respond to each suggestion in its own subsection.

Dedicated page for requests for admin/EW action

I propose that we create Scratch Wiki:Requests for Privileged Actions (WIP title) - basically, if something needs an admin or EW to handle it, post a message there instead of on one of the admin/EW's talks or on the CP.

Pros:

• Makes requests for privileged actions more public and easier for all admins/EWs to see.
• Clears up clutter on admin/EW talk pages as well as the Community Portal.

Cons:

• New page.

Thoughts?
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  13:34, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Any examples of what would required privileged actions that is not covered by a template (such as {{delete}})?

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 14:47, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

I do agree with this.
Purplewolves (talk | contribs) 19:02, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

I agree with KrIsMa — and also, if we don't have a template, we could always create a new one, right?
bigpuppy talk | contribs 02:04, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

There actually is a template for protection but no-one uses it - they simply post on an admin's talk.

As for other actions, it's true that tagging pages with {{delete}} guarantees that it'll be deleted sooner or later... good point.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  07:46, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

+1 with K2S:Templates aren't very useful forediting protected pages or deleting logs, and some. I asked an admin to add ja-interwiki to the News, but he didn't.--
Apple502j (talk | contribs) 12:57, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Support. (PS Apple502j the admins are very busy and can't get to everything on time) I think this page will therefore be a nice addition. How are we going to deal with the templates mentioned then?

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 14:33, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

@Apple502j: interwiki is only done by bureaucrats (i.e. Scratch Team members) on this wiki.

@KrIsMa: I think we can just use both - it's always helpful to have multiple points of contact and if the categories for those templates have a large backlog we can post on that page too, instead of here.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  00:38, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Since I think anyone who wants to voice their opinion has already done so, and everyone seems to agree here, the only thing left to discuss is the name - what should the title of this page be? My initial thought was "Scratch Wiki:Requests for Privileged Action" but that seems too long and too wordy - any other suggestions?
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  09:25, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

We could with "Scratch Wiki: Privileged Action Requests"
Bla-Games (talk | contribs) 18:35, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Subpages for each topic

My idea here is: for each new topic, we make a separate subpage. So this topic would not be a topic - it would be Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal/Dedicated page for privileged action requests; subpages for each topic. Once a discussion is resolved, it will be "closed" by having the page protected. Once it is old enough to be archived, it is archived, by moving the contents to one of the normal archives (which will remain in effect) and either deleting the subpage (might break links) or redirecting it to that section (better).

To summarize the above novel:

1. A user thinks of something that they want to say to the entire community.
2. The user creates a subpage of the Community Portal, the title being what would normally be the section title (avoiding slashes).
3. Other users respond to the topic in that subpage, and a consensus is reached as to how to proceed.
4. Once the consensus has been implemented, an admin protects the page, preventing further discussion, and thereby closes the topic. Other users can ask (at "requests for privileged action", suggested above, or on an admin's talk) for it to be reopened if they think more discussion is needed.
5. After a while, any admin can decide that the topic is old enough to be archived (meaning truly locking further discussion and requiring a new topic for revival) and moves the contents of the topic subpage to an archive.

Since a central place for asking questions in general will still be needed, I think, we could create something similar to Wikipedia's "village pump"

Pros

• Organizes discussion immensely - this frees each topic from being in context of another.
• Requires topics to be more important - it's a waste of space to make a separate page asking "how do you make things bold?".
• Makes it easier to link to particular CP topics - Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal/topic name is a lot less ephemeral of a title than Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal#topic name, and also makes it easier to show which topics don't actually exist.
• Drastically decreases load time.

Cons

• Increases the number of pages drastically.
• Makes flipping through topics more difficult - you can't scroll through them, you have to navigate to a separate page for each.

I understand this is quite a momentous suggestion - please post your opinion.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  13:34, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Personally, I think it is good the way it is. It may make it more complicated for new users then just making a new topic, and is it really needed to protect the page, because further discussion is good sometimes.

Another thing about the request, is that, it just makes the wiki seem more untidy (in my eyes) and would be annoying to get around. Plus: The users would have to make a new sub page for it, then make it into a talk page, Etc. Excuse me if I missed something here.
Purplewolves (talk | contribs) 19:00, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Another pro would be the shorter load time of the CP

But..I'm going to have to go with purplewolves — in my opinion it's easier the way it is
bigpuppy talk | contribs 02:08, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

That's true, it would make loading time shorter, but as I said, it would get annoying.
Purplewolves (talk | contribs) 03:59, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

There's a reason I suggested having something similar to Wikipedia's village pump - things that would require easier flipping could be posted there, while momentous things that need separation from each other could go in subpages instead. I know it seems like defeating the purpose of the suggestion, but maybe instead of making a separate page for easy-flipping talk, instead making a separate page for suggestions might work?

Basically, the major point of this is that suggestions need to be distinct and worth suggesting; questions can be simple questions that wouldn't need such distinction.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  07:46, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

something like that is mentioned in different recent posts + continued at: #A little reorganization of old topics
 MartinWollenweber  Talk  Contribs  Directory  12:35, 22 February 2018 (CET)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ Since this has gone stagnant, and it doesn't seem like as good an idea as it seemed when I proposed it, I'll treat this as Done by rejection.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  10:08, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Wait one second! How is this done if it wasn't archived yet?
NYCDOT [ Talk Page | Contributions | Directory ] 20:23, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

My edit count seems to be out of sync

Not done

If I transclude my edit count, I get 7,253; but on the actual page, the "Total" count is 362 more than the transcluded count! What's going on?
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  07:51, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Werid. If I do it, I get 329 but that is actually a few less than the count on the page.
  Duckboycool  (Talk | Contribs | Edits) 13:43, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Same here! The only difference is that mine is only 10 behind.
Drunken_Sailor (talk | contribs) 14:21, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Is anybody else having the same problem?
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  09:18, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Actually, when transcluded, my Editcount is 25 less than the real count...
Drunken_Sailor (talk | contribs) 11:45, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Is this discussion still active? If so, this is happening to me too. My transcluded edit count is 34 less than what it says on Special:Editcount/bigpuppy.
bigpuppy talk | contribs 13:38, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Mine is 3 less, and I think I found the problem: Uploads of new image versions are not counted in the transcluded count, but they do in the real page.
Yzyzyz (talk | contribs) 11:38, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Ah, that makes sense.
bigpuppy talk | contribs 15:33, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Done?
bob1171 (talk | contribs) on the Community Portal. 17:59, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

No, we don't know how to fix it yet, it's Not done
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  08:04, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Account Request Notes

Not done

I, when, recently doing account requests (yes, I do still use this thing) I have noticed that I am not learning much about what this user wants to edit and why they want to join the wiki. I like this system which identifies things to fix, but I feel that we should also add back some of the old application. I suggest adding the wiki experience, why they should be accepted, and an article to edit, and then have the current Find 3 Add 2 system. Opinions?
Cυƨтσмнαcκεя ( тαʟκ | cσптяıв ) 02:34, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Take Example:

There is a capital S in the word "Screen" in the middle of a sentence that should not be capitalized. There is a dead link to the page "Oranges." There is the first person used under the paragraph called "Pineapples." It would be possible to add a section about Kiwis under the header of "Awesome Fruits." It would be possible to add a picture of an orange to the section titled "Oranges". The secret word is "Bananas"

With this example (which is totally about fruits) as long as they use complete sentences and basically fit this point:

• In the request notes, does the user properly identify at least 3 flaws in the flawed article and 2 things to add?
• Saying "I found a grammar error" is not clear
• Users must actually make sense of what they are talking about.
• If the specific examples of what they would add to the flawed article are not allowed on the Wiki (e.g. writing about their projects), fully reject if there was little effort, partially reject if it seems like you could get more ideas out of them or explain to them why it's not allowed.

Then they can be accepted into the wiki. This system, In my opinion, only tests the reading comprehension and if the user can write in complete sentences. It shows nothing about if the user can navigate the wiki or know what they want to edit. We get nothing of why they deserve to be a wikian. I belie these systems need to be combined.
Cυƨтσмнαcκεя ( тαʟκ | cσптяıв ) 02:45, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

I'm hesitant about making request notes more intensive like this because it makes it harder, and scares away more people. I think the current system is good enough on its own.

That being said, I do agree that the current system doesn't really make users show why they want to join; perhaps require an actual article that they would edit, as before, but nothing beyond that.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  04:37, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Interesting; I do see what you are saying, Customhacker. But I also see what Kenny2scratch is saying. I don't think it would hurt to add another small thing, like "Please explain why you want to join the wiki in your request notes."

I don't think that's too much, is it?
bigpuppy talk | contribs 00:27, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Not Done doesn't get enough attention

Not done

So I was browsing through Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal/Not Done and realized that all of the discussions had been moved there and left to rot simply because they happened to last longer than an archive period. I suggest that we do at least one of the following things:

---

Don't have a separate Not Done page at all and keep the not done discussions on the main CP.

This would be effective but not feasible.

Pros

Great at keeping attention on topics.

Cons

Would likely break links and increase CP loading time.

---

Link to them in a more obvious way

This would be feasible but potentially not effective.

Pros

Saves space, keeps links.

Cons

Doesn't really solve the problem. Nobody wants to click an extra link just to get to topics they might not even care that much about. From my point of view, people comment on discussions because they're new and they want to get their opinion in. When a discussion takes an extra click to get to and has been rotting for so long, it no longer is attractive to comment on. Also, the Not Done page actually feels like an archive more than another discussion page - thereby discouraging new comments on it.

---

Have an entirely separate page for not done topics (maybe "Scratch Wiki talk:Not Done"?).

This would be partially feasible but potentially effective too.

Pros

Wouldn't break links (redirects exist, people), and would remove the feeling of an archive since it's a talk page of its own; would also save space on the actual CP because the content is literally in another page.

Cons

Still needs another click, and still seems too separate from the actual CP.

What are your thoughts? Do you have another suggestion for this problem? Do you have an opinion on or amendment to one of the current suggestions? Discuss!
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  14:12, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

I think putting {{Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal/Not Done}} is better - we can still put them here, and no problem for page size.
Apple502j Talk/Activities 1,690edit 02:15, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Page size would still be a problem - the point is, there is so much content here that browsers need a long time to load the page. Also, by transcluding the not done page, it has to parse the contents of that page anyway, so the only thing that does is increase loading time.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  03:36, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

This is something that definitely needs to be addressed, I personally think the last option is the best, but it is a hard one.
-Vuton- (Talk | Contribs | Pages) 22:40, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

I also vote for the last option.
 MartinWollenweber  Talk  Contribs  Directory  07:42, 19 February 2018 (CET)

^
banana439monkey (Talk | Contribs | Scratch | Edits (1,960)) 12:52, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Something like that is mentioned in different recent posts + continued at: #A little reorganization of old topics
 MartinWollenweber  Talk  Contribs  Directory  12:39, 22 February 2018 (CET)

I suggest adding a link in page options.
banana439monkey (Talk | Contribs | Scratch | Edits (1,960)) 13:19, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

VisualEditor extension

Everyone knows that wiki markup is difficult to understand, and frankly, it disconnects users from the actual content. Though previewing is possible, it's annoying to do frequently, and some people don't even use it at all.

Therefore, I propose we get VisualEditor. This allows editing of pages without having to interact with wikitext at all - select some text, press Ctrl+B, and it becomes bold right in front of your eyes! Type in {{, and a menu will pop up asking which template you want to add.

I feel like this would help a lot for new users who might not feel like learning a whole markup language.

There is a prerequisite - I need to make sure that the SWS is compatible with it. But otherwise, I think this would be very helpful to install.

Thoughts?
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  10:16, 17 February 2018 (CET)

+1 very good idea!
 MartinWollenweber  Talk  Contribs  Directory  10:24, 17 February 2018 (CET)

After looking at the extension, It's a big +1 from me.
-Vuton- (Talk | Contribs | Pages) 11:04, 17 February 2018 (CET)

I definitely like this idea.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 05:54, 18 February 2018 (CET)

There is a large prerequisite I didn't notice before: This requires Parsoid to be installed. This may pose a larger challenge - especially for FTP backend people, Parsoid can only be installed via command-line.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  05:58, 18 February 2018 (CET)

I‘m not sure if Parsoid will be possible at our webspace. We have to ask akhof.
 MartinWollenweber  Talk  Contribs  Directory  08:11, 18 February 2018 (CET)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ +1 I think that having an editor similar to Wikia would be nice.
S-zhangcha (talk | contribs) 02:54, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Removing the "EW" usergroup

Let me give you some background on the EW usergroup first. It was created for two main reasons:

• All the bureaucrats were Scratch Team members - the Wiki didn't have control over its own usergroups. So EW was created to be the equivalent of "admin" in a bureaucrat-less wiki. Basically, EW substituted admin and admin substituted bureaucrat.
• There were a lot of account requests, so EW was made to help the admins process them all.

The first thing is no longer true. We now have our own bureaucrats (*cough cough* yours truly *cough cough*).

The second thing, though still true, is not as pressing. Now that we have active bureaucrats, we can confirm accounts just as quickly as we did before with EWs. In fact, there are very few EWs now that are not also bureaucrats.

So some of us have proposed that we get rid of the EW usergroup entirely. Then elections would be for admins, not EWs; and (I guess?) any current EWs would become admins.

Thoughts?
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  13:32, 18 February 2018 (CET)

I always saw the EW role as a way to gain trust in users, before giving them full admin permissions, however, I do mostly agree with you.
-Vuton- (Talk | Contribs | Pages) 14:37, 18 February 2018 (CET)

Support! Here are some ideas upon what we could do:
Unlike Cazzy's server, we shouldn't get rid of one of the EWs for no reason at all. We should have admin in place of EW and per election, those admins would be upgraded to bureaucrats. Ernie told me that we'd have admins for a few months, then upgrade them to bureaucrat. I prefer this idea. It's not necessary and confusing now.
banana439monkey (Talk | Contribs | Scratch | Edits (1,960)) 16:38, 18 February 2018 (CET)

Good arguments, but perhaps it's still a good idea to have a "two stage way" to admin rights? The important thing would be to have a acceptable difference in rights between admin and EWs.
 MartinWollenweber  Talk  Contribs  Directory  09:04, 19 February 2018 (CET)

But really, I don't see the point in EW.
banana439monkey (Talk | Contribs | Scratch | Edits (1,960)) 12:29, 19 February 2018 (CET)

I agree with Martin. The only major right EWs have other than admins is protect, so EWs can't edit pages that only some more experienced users such as admins can edit effectively (such as the front page). I also think EWs should get all other perms such as undelete, etc. so they can maintain the Wiki as stated in their position description. But then there wouldn't be an acceptable difference in rights between admins and EWs.

My thoughts:

1. Delete EW role and promote directly to admin.
2. Protect admin only pages (such as the FP) as bureaucrat only. This means adding that protection level.

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 17:38, 19 February 2018 (CET)

I feel like protecting admin only pages as bureaucrat only would be editlockedpages all over again - but hey, the FP is protected for a reason, so it's not too big of a deal. Support.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  06:32, 21 February 2018 (CET)

Support! This makes sense as the roles aren't really different. EWs could definitely serve better with more adminship positions. I also support the idea of new protection level.
Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs) 15:21, 3 March 2018 (CET)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ Just note: this would likely re-introduce an "editlockedpages" equivalent and also promote every current EW to admin.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  15:25, 3 March 2018 (CET)

so can remove the usergroup now?

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 01:50, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

I think we should remove the EW usergroup. As Ken said, the two reasons aren't strong enough to keep this group. There just isn't a reason to have EWs.
CrazyBoy826 | Talk | Contribs | Scratch account | More... 16:05, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Not done?
NYCDOT [ Talk Page | Contributions | Directory ] 22:00, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Nah, I'll mark this as Done in favor of Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal#Let's change EW stuff moar.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  03:00, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

New page idea: Scratch Wiki:Community Projects

Not done

I have an idea for a new page, which is Scratch Wiki:Community Projects. This page would be for, well, "projects" the wiki community is working on. Each "project" would be in a subpage of Scratch Wiki:Community Projects.

An example of something that could be worked on using this is the in-progress privacy policy. After the project is done, it would be moved to the correct place.

I'm suggesting this because when working on stuff like this at the moment, we mostly use personal sandboxes (I think). This works, but a downside is that you need to give permission for other users to help edit, as it's a personal sandbox under userspace. I don't think we could use the main sandbox, as WikiMonitor clears it (and I don't think it's really intended for this kind of thing). This new page would be specifically used for community "projects" that anyone can help work on.

On the main community projects page, there would be...

• An explanation of the page
• A list of current "projects"
• A list of finished "projects" that used the page

So, what do you think? Sorry if I'm not explaining my idea that well, so feel free to ask questions (and give feedback).
bigpuppy talk | contribs 17:40, 19 February 2018 (CET)

That sounds like a great idea. Although, couldn't we not use our sandboxes to house these articles and just put it in mainspace with the {{In Progress}} template?

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 17:45, 19 February 2018 (CET)

+1 This sounds like a great idea. It'll also help users interact with the community more, as well as allow for better collaboration on large projects and pages.
Drunken_Sailor (talk | contribs) 20:32, 19 February 2018 (CET)

@KrIsMa True, but this could also be for stuff like the privacy policy page that is currently being worked on, which wouldn't be a mainspace page. Although, I suppose we could just put it under "Scratch Wiki:" and put that template on it...
bigpuppy talk | contribs 01:34, 20 February 2018 (CET)

But this is for community projects, so maybe {{stub}}? I still think we should have a page for it though.
bigpuppy talk | contribs 01:51, 20 February 2018 (CET)

Yeah that was what I wanted to say. So, I am not sure. Maybe the reason why people start articles in their sandbox is because they don't know that inprogress articles can also be put into not their subpages, I have no idea.

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 03:20, 20 February 2018 (CET)

I apreciate introducing something like projects and projectpages very much. But I would‘t like to have a separete (project) list, I had to look for additional to CP, to know „everything discussed in public at the wiki“. I think this Community Portal should stay the general List to get an overview about all this matters. And CP is also the location where new projects „grow“ that have no project-status at first. So why not combine all the issues:

• Community Portal often gets to long
• „not done“ does not get enough attention
• let‘s start with project pages

We could "allow" or "suggest" to make a (project) subpage for each CP-issue that gets "to long + to old" and let only a header with an introduction (not longer then a teaser) here in CP. We could this header give a marker „this is a project“ (instead of „not done“). Fineshed projects go to the CP-archive. So the whole Project-Ideas could be introduced simply as an enlargement of this Community Portal without disrupting attention of the community in to much different locations. What do you think?
 MartinWollenweber  Talk  Contribs  Directory  07:22, 20 February 2018 (CET)

+ As the result of a project mostely is a new article, but the project-page where you move a discussion, started in CP, is always a talk-page, there could be always this combination: Projectresults go to an article-page, project-discussion goes to the talk-page of this article.
 MartinWollenweber  Talk  Contribs  Directory  07:32, 20 February 2018 (CET)

+ continued at: #A little reorganization of old topics
 MartinWollenweber  Talk  Contribs  Directory  08:40, 21 February 2018 (CET)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Please note: I know I said in the first post that I think we use personal sandboxes for the most part now, but I noticed we also use other stuff under people's userspace (at the moment).
bigpuppy talk | contribs 17:41, 23 February 2018 (CET)

A little reorganization of old topics

So, MartinWollenweber has been suggesting this for a while, but nobody's thought to bring this up as a topic of its own, so I thought I'd take the liberty of doing so.

The suggestion is: if a topic remains "not done" (or anything other than "done") for a long time, move it to its own subpage of the CP. This would remove the need for S:CPND, and would likely reduce loading times. Of course, there would be something at the top of the CP showing all the current "long time + hard work" topics.
Once the topics are finally "done", they should remain in their subpage, but the subpage should be protected to prevent further editing. That way, previous links to that subpage won't break or have to be redirected.

This would likely transcend the need for any of these suggestions or any of these suggestions, and would be a lot smoother, too! But there may be something I overlooked. Thoughts?
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  06:12, 21 February 2018 (CET)

We are moving to the right direction, but let‘s also include S:CP#New_page_idea:_Scratch_Wiki:Community_Projects. There you see that making the „long + old not dones“ a „scratch wiki project“=SWP could help. As there seems to be many SWPs that are the “creating or overworking of an existing article” but also others, that have no article in the mainspace I suggest:

Introducing SWPs = Scratch Wiki Projects

• Let‘s make some SWP-templates: One is a SWP-marker+data template you use as a the head of a SWP. This SWP-marker+data holds the projectname, projectdescription, projectowner (=responsible!!!), project team members, project status, start+end date and so on. Also a project numer cold help to organize and reference to the projecs.
• This SWP-marker+data gets in the only-include section of the projectpage. A second SWP-reference-template (or simple “SWP-box”) can be used, to represent the SWP-marker+data at an other location, specially here at the CP but perhaps also at other locations like a project list page or when you want to reference to SWPs at other discussions. :*Because this projectmarker can include categories its possible to have projects automatically be listed and sorted by category.
• I would prefer that every SWP has a separate SWP-article and SWP-talkpage. The project article can, but must not be an article in the mainspace. It can also be an article in a “project sub space” but it always has a talk page for the discussion and a result-page, that can be the article itself in case its located in the mainspace.
• The SWP-reference templates (you can have multiple, depending how detailed the cited projectdata shoud be shown) can also include links to the project resultpage and the project talkpage.
• If a thread here in the CP gets to long, to old, or should better move to the artile discussion, you are free to set up a SWP by choosing or creating an article where the SWP should take place and putting a new SWP-marker there with yourself as the projectowner
• As there will also be a status and list for “rotten projcts” you should only start projects you really feel responsible for because else you get the reputation of “the owner of the most rotten projects” ;-) this helps to avoid “project inflation” that could be caused by the thought “I cearate many project, but will not do the work”.
• After the SWP-marker is set up, the SWP can be presented at the CP discussion by using one SWP-reference-template that gives you a nice box with the projectdata. Later the CP thread itself can be moved to the SWP-talk page, so that only the SWP-representation-box stays in the CP until the status of the project project is "finished" or "rotten".
• SWPs could automatically get “rotten” if nobody edited their result-page or their talk-page for a certain amount if time.

Thoughts?
 MartinWollenweber  Talk  Contribs  Directory  08:30, 21 February 2018 (CET)

I think the SWP template could be something like this? (That's an old template idea of mine.)

So if I'm getting you right, you're thinking of something similar to the CP but for things that specifically need "long time + hard work"? And each project is in a subpage, instead of as a section? That seems like a good idea - for example the ScratchSig extension's discussion could go in one subpage?

I'm not sure what you mean by "each SWP should have a separate SWP-article and SWP-talkpage", though - isn't each SWP a discussion? Or am I missing something?
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  13:38, 22 February 2018 (CET)

• Your suggestion for the SWT.template looks interesting. Originally I thougt it should look a littel bit like the round boxes used in FAQ-answers (e.g. What is SEO spam?) because additional to the different fields it must contain a teaser-like Projectdescription and the SWP-box will be the last that stays in CP when a CP-thread is moved to a talk-page of a project. So perhaps better have something that fills the complete row, not just a box on the right.
• To explain better what a SWP would be: Any article in mainspace, but also in any other space can get the status to be a project, just by adding the SWP-marker+data template at the top of its talk-page. If an article in mainspace is declared as a project the project-resultpage is the article itself: So it's very easy to say: "I want to work myself and am searching people to help me with this article": Only put a SWP-marker+data template at the top of the articles discussion page and put the SWP-reference-box in the CP.
• Good examples in the actual CP where you could use that kind of projects are the threads:

• #Privacy Policy and
• #We need to have a disclaimer

• Naturally there will be projects, that have no article in mainspace and that are "just projects": But also for this "just projects" its helpfull to have two pages: The result-page where you find all generell information an decissions in a brief form and the talk-page where you find and can talk part in the discussion that has lead to this results. Fo this "just projects" we should define a space where we can collect them.
• It's even possible to create a project at a subpage of your userpage and invite others. Here I made a example to show how it could roughly look like (just how it would look like!!! Doing it with templates would be much more spophisticated) :

SWP 001 - My Test Projects Name

This is the description of my test project

project data

project data

project data

project data

project discussion project results location of my testproject in CP

• In this case I put the SWP-box also at the project results page because it helps with navigation. We should discuss if this is acceptable in generall, specially if the project is an article in mainspace.
• I think with this realively easy concept of projects we are fast, flexible and easy to understand, if it's transfered to templates that are looking good and very handy to use.

Do you now understand what I tried to explain above? What do you think?
 MartinWollenweber  Talk  Contribs  Directory  15:59, 22 February 2018 (CET)

Ah, that makes more sense! So you mean any page can be converted into a SWP just by adding the template, and then discussion for the project will be on the talk page? And there will be a link to the project from the CP as well? That sounds like a great idea!

I think we should wait for others to comment on this discussion; then once we know everyone's ok with it we can proceed to design the template and then get this started!

How about the idea of moving "long time + hard work" topics to subpages of the Community Portal, though? I think that would still be a good idea to keep, since it still does make the CP more organized and reduces loading time a bit. Thoughts?
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  17:06, 22 February 2018 (CET)

• more sense: Yes, now you got me right!
• Waiting for others to agree: Yes, in any case. Hope they also like it and add more ideas...
• moving "long time + hard work": You could do that with exact the same technique, if there is no fitting article to put the project in, e.g. you could use:

• Scratch_Wiki:Community_Porta/sectionname_of_not_done_section for result and
• Scratch_Wiki_talk:Community_Portal/sectionname_of_not_done_section for discussion

or

• Scratch_Wiki:Community_Porta/notdone/sectionname_of_not_done_section for result and
• Scratch_Wiki_talk:Community_Portal/notdone/sectionname_of_not_done_section for discussion

 MartinWollenweber  Talk  Contribs  Directory  17:31, 22 February 2018 (CET)

I like the template! A +1 from me. I have some questions:

• How exactly will the template work? Will it be like this?

{{SWP|link to talk page|link to project page|link to Community Portal section|project #}}

• Will there be a main page with a list of projects and their numbers (and possibly a description of each one)?
  bigpuppy talk | contribs 17:52, 22 February 2018 (CET)

There will be at least two templates, one top at the project page like:

* {{SWPdata| projctnumber |projectname |projectdescription |projectowner |projectstatus | projctstartdate | projectenddate |...}} and

* {{SWPbox|projectpagename}} (used in CP, no other parameters needed)

Any not finished project should have at least a SWPbox in CP. Additionell there could be other articles that list projects, but if the SWPbox-trmplate could also include categories, list of projects could also easy generated automatically
 MartinWollenweber  Talk  Contribs  Directory  18:18, 22 February 2018 (CET)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Okay. Should we make a page with an explanation and a list (automatically updated like you said)? Or the template(s)?
bigpuppy talk | contribs 18:26, 22 February 2018 (CET)

Maybe Scratch Wiki:Projects?
bigpuppy talk | contribs 18:27, 22 February 2018 (CET)

An additional listing of SWPs at an own page is always possible, but never essential as project will always be starting in a CP thread and the SWPbox stays there , after the duscussion of that thread was moved to the projects talk page, until the project is finished or rotten. A lists of projects can be automatically created by categories. A page with a separate manual listing of all projects is somewhat artificial and tends to be unmantained. But it can be done by somone who is interested. I supphose that the projectowners will not care for that separate list themself, because for them it‘s enough to put the SWPmarker in the project and the SWPbox in the CP thread.
 MartinWollenweber  Talk  Contribs  Directory  23:18, 22 February 2018 (CET)

Or maybe we could have a page that has an explanation but only links to the category so it doesn't need to be updated?
bigpuppy talk | contribs 01:42, 23 February 2018 (CET)

Yes, that‘s a good idea! The concept of SWP has to be explained somwhere in any case, and to present the SWP-categories there is the best place. We can have multiple SWPcategories e.g. sorted by projectstate and by projectspace, because the category inside the SWPdata-template could be conditional and dependent of data or space. So with your suggestion we have a place to explain the SWP-concept and to jump into the „list of all active/finished/rotten project“ all projects in „mainspace/projectspace/userspave“ and so on.
 MartinWollenweber  Talk  Contribs  Directory  07:15, 23 February 2018 (CET)

Okay, I have a prototype of a template, here. How's it look?
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  15:40, 23 February 2018 (CET)

Looks good, but do we understand each other right concerning that the SWPdata should only be defined one time at the top of the SWP-talkpage? The SWPbox in the CP and anywhere else should only be a template that shows the same data, but does not include the data itself in its parameters (the only paramter would be the pagename of the SWPdata). Its a littel like the Translate-template at the Test-Wiki ( tw:Eng:Scratch_Wiki_Home/translate ). To have multiple SWPbox-formats e.g. small and big ones (SWPbox1 , SWPbox2 ...) the SWPdata could be in <onlyinclude> so you don't see it at it's page and it delivers only the parameterstring that than goes into a SWPbox within <noinclude> that does the visualisation on that page. You could than put the {{page}} within any SWPbox-template, that can visualize that parameterstring. That's really a bit of sophisticated template programming but I think you are familiar with that. Right?
 MartinWollenweber  Talk  Contribs  Directory  16:28, 23 February 2018 (CET)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ I created a page with an explanation of Scratch Wiki Projects here; feel free to add to it and edit it.
bigpuppy talk | contribs 18:29, 23 February 2018 (CET)

I fixed up my template (again, see here). Also, I will demo the CP-topic part:

SWP 001 - Make SWP template

Description	Status	Owner	Started	Links
This template will eventually be the template used for Scratch Wiki Projects.	Not done	Kenny2scratch	23/2/2018	Project results
				Project page
				Project discussion

@mtwoll: is this what you had in mind?
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  07:45, 25 February 2018 (CET)

Yes, looks good! You saw my idea below that would enable us to have all projectdata at one page? You already said „it‘s to much“ but it has some advantages...
 MartinWollenweber  Talk  Contribs  Directory  08:09, 25 February 2018 (CET)

I got the impression we have been a little bit stucked with this matter...so perhaps the best is to give one version of SWP a try and see how it works?

I would prefer that the first version of the SWP-box looks the same everywhere to get used to it. I', mot sure if my last idea to have all SWP-data at one page with the help of section-transclusion is best, but it would help to always find the last number and have a section with an existing PWC-data-definition to copy from if you create an new one...also you could reference the PWC-data with the section-headline that could be year+PWS-Nr (starting with PWS 1 every year again,(e.g. PWS2018-001..PWS2018-038 and PWS2019-001..PWS2019-033). But perhaps also having the data in each separate PWS-discussion-page is best...we will see..

Better let's start now somehow and learn if it works than waiting much longer.
 MartinWollenweber  Talk  Contribs  Directory  17:11, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Are we still going to do this?
bigpuppy talk | contribs 22:28, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

New page for intro/outro

I think this is a big thing right know so should we have a main space article about intros/outros on one page or on two pages? Also will anyone help we write it?

asqwde talk | contribs 13:50, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Hmmmm, are you talking about a intro/outro to a project?
NYCDOT (talk | contribs) 20:58, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Yes i am

asqwde talk | contribs 16:38, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Not done
NYCDOT [ Talk Page | Contributions | Directory ] 14:38, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Changing S:NOSP

Done

In the Scratch Jam topic, most of my motivation for opposition was because S:NOSP disallows featuring user-generated content on the Wiki. However, after the transfer, I believe this should be changed a little bit.

Last night, I realized one crucial flaw with the rule after the transfer: the Wiki itself is now user-generated content. Therefore, technically the page Scratch Wiki itself would break it if it weren't for the Scratch Team involvement occasionally (cough Wiki Wednesday cough). Because of this, I propose a rule change that might satisfy everyone (and the now-moot topic above): Instead of requiring official Scratch Team sponsorship, I think that if something deserves a place on the Wiki, it only needs to have either at least one Scratch Team member involved or be directly related to Scratch. For example, the above Scratch Jam fits both of those conditions - it's a Scratch Jam and it had Lifay involved. However, Scratch Jams would not get a Scratch Wiki: page because they are not directly Wiki related. As to my previous argument that user-generated content would provoke spite, I believe now (though I didn't before) that a single Scratch Team member or a clear relationship with Scratch is enough to quell such hatred.

What do you think about this rule change? Are there unintentional side effects I failed to mention? Or is there some extra advantage you know about? What are your thoughts?
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  02:11, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

First of all thanks for driving this! The least one Scratch Team member involved or be directly related to Scratch is a good start. Where would that sentence go in? There is already a point in S:NOSP: Topics that have been considered important/notable enough in Scratch's history by a majority of wiki editors that they deserve an article. (ex. Kaj, Removed Pac-Man Project, etc.).

I would also suggest to add the Scratch Club decisions here, since they are results of a discussion of several responsible people, all results are documented and Martin is typically taking part. The Scratch Club meeting originated from the German wiki, but many decisions of the Wiki transition have been discussed there. There is also an english-speaking international version of it, all thinks related to a non-german Wiki should be discussed there. The reason why I want to have Martin in is that he is the official main reponsible of all Wikis now and the guy carrying all the financial and legal risk. Note that this would be just a seat in the council, not a dictatorship.

So my suggestion is to extend the point as follows:

Topics that have been considered important/notable enough in Scratch's history (e.g. endorsement by a ST team member, a documented Scratch Club decision, or a majority of wiki editors) that they deserve an article. (ex. Kaj, Removed Pac-Man Project, etc.).

For the second part, I don't fully get the requirement of wiki-related. After all most of the articles are about Scratch and not related to the Wiki. I think the main criteria should be being Scratch-related and being notable. For example the Scratch Jam, in its current form, should not get its own page because it appears to get not too many submissions and therefore is most likely smaller than many studios on Scratch, however if, let's say, a Scratch becomes more popular in the gamedev scene because of this or some notable YouTube or Switch streamers cover the event (just wishful thinking :-) ), it would be notable and could have its own page. To give another example, if Snap! would not have its own page it would deserve one because of its importance in teaching and as a follow-up language for Scratch, despite being not directly related to the Scratch page or the wiki.
Frodewin (talk | contribs) 06:52, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

There's an English-speaking international Scratch Club?? Where do I join??

I think it would be better to adapt the point like this:

“

Exceptions to this rule include topics receiving endorsement from a Scratch Team member, documented Scratch Club decisions, topics enormously important to Scratch culture (e.g. Kaj, Removed Pac-Man Project, etc.), or other topics agreed on by a majority of Wiki editors.

”

The related-to-Wiki requirement is about getting pages in the Scratch Wiki namespace rather than the mainspace, don't mind it - I shouldn't have brought it up, as it's a topic for another day.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  07:22, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

A slight modification.

“

Exceptions to this rule include topics receiving endorsement from a Scratch Team member, documented Scratch Club decisions, topics enormously important to Scratch culture (e.g. Kaj, Removed Pac-Man Project, etc.), or other topics agreed on by a majority of Wiki editors and administrators.

”

Also I hate the be the naysayer here: but can we clarify the phrase "endorsement from a Scratch Team member"? Wouldn't that mean that every person followed by a Scratch Team member would be notable enough to deserve an article?

Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs) 12:39, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

A follow is not an endorsement. A follow simply indicates that the ST member likes the user's content and wants to see when they release more - it does not indicate that the ST member is "sponsoring" the user, like they are when they help organize a Scratch Jam.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  12:58, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Ah. The never-ending Internet debate about whether a like = endorsement. RT != Endorsement!
Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs) 19:11, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Lol.
Cυƨтσмнαcκεя ( тαʟκ | cσптяıв ) 00:08, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

My executive decision on this is to add "Topics that are confirmed to have involved at least one Scratch Team member" to the bulleted list of exceptions to the rule. I don't think "documented Scratch Club" decisions is related to Scratch; those would likely be in projectspace pages, which have different rules.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  21:41, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

This topic is now Done.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  21:41, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

English Scratch Club

Not done

The Scratch club is a weekly meeting among a group of Scratchers which are contributing actively to the Scratch Wiki and to Scratch in general. The meetings are used to discuss important issues, most notable was the discussion if the transition of the english Wiki should take place. Currently, the weekly meetings are held in German, but we used to have an international Scratch club following after the German one. An alternative could be to make it alternating every week between German and English. As a start, who of the English and international Wiki administrators would be interested in it and able to join? And what would be better: weekly every Monday at 9:00 PM CET or bi-weekly at 8:00 PM? Once I get a tendency about the if and when, I will bring it up at the next German Scratch club, perhaps already next Monday.
Frodewin (talk | contribs) 20:54, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Aw man! I wish I was a admin. Well, I am pretty sure someone (Cough cough Kenny2scatch Cough Cough)
NYCDOT (talk | contribs) 22:14, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

I would definitely like to join, but neither 8 or 9 PM CET work for me - I'm in Hong Kong, and 8PM CET is 3AM HKT... Best would be on weekends, since everyone's time is likely to be more flexible - on weekdays, we have work and school, but on weekends times that would normally be during work/school are usually ok. Would 2PM CET on Saturdays (or Sundays) be workable?
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  02:32, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Hey, I noticed where I live, that 8/9 PM is 3 PMEST(end of school day!), but 2PM CET is 8AMEST which is not good.
NYCDOT (talk | contribs) 11:53, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Welcoming Committee or Scratch Welcoming Committee

Hello. I left this post on its talk but no one answered. Should it be scratch welcoming committee or welcoming committee here.

Reasons why welcoming committee

1. That is the name for the project submsissions studio
2. Name of private forum

Reasons why scratch welcoming committee

1. Often abbreviated as SWC not WC
2. Name of main studio

So what should it be?

asqwde talk | contribs 14:50, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

I believe it should be "Welcoming Committee". Here's my rationale.

For as long as the Wiki has existed, it has been about documentation of Scratch. Therefore, Scratch is its mainspace; all articles are related to Scratch in some way. Where Wikipedia's mainspace is literally everything, or the Meta-Wikipedia's mainspace is Wikipedia itself, the Scratch Wiki's mainspace is Scratch. Because of that, I think a "Scratch" in the title is redundant for all pages, except for cases like Scratch, (where omitting "Scratch" would cause an empty title) Scratch Team, (because "Scratch Team" is a proper name) or Scratch Wiki (because we're not just called "Wiki"). In my insistent opinion articles like Scratch Trends should just be called "Trends" (I'll be opening up a new topic about this), but I'm holding off on moving such articles until we have more consensus; meanwhile, "Welcoming Committee" is ideal, and should not be moved.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  01:14, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

I do see what you are saying, Kenny2scratch, but then again, couldn't you argue that "Scratch Welcoming Committee!" is the name of the studio (kind of you like how you said "Scratch Wiki" is the name of this wiki)? However, I do see what you are saying.
bigpuppy talk | contribs 22:54, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

A slight spinoff of an above topic: subpages for each Not done topic

Hi all,

I have a small idea that loosely ties in with an idea suggested above: instead of having all of the Not done topics be on one page, move each topic into a separate page. I think this would be beneficial for the Not Done page, since if a topic has stayed alive long enough to be moved to Not Done it's usually pretty long.

Pros

• Organizes Not Done topics much better
• Decreases loading time

Cons

• Requires more clicks
• Potentially harder to browse through

Thoughts?
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  08:49, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Have you noticed how little activity appears in that page? Separating it into more subpages will further decrease activity... We might as well just scrap the not-done page altogether and just solely use the community portal.

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 14:53, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

Nuh-uh! Scrapping the not done page would clog up the CP a LOT. I also seriously doubt that separating it into subpages would decrease activity: the same way that every CP archive has a TOC of other archives, each not done page could have a TOC of other not done pages, using this:

{{Special:PrefixIndex/Scratch Wiki talk:Community Portal/Not Done}}

I've also just added a link to the not done page in the sidebar. Hopefully editors will notice that and use it :)
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  00:28, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Keeping a TOC is a good idea, but if we separate all the pages, editors who don't rely on the TOC and scroll to see other discussions (like me..) will have a hard time, further decreasing the activity of discussions. The "requiring more clicks" issue is also an important one, IMHO.

But if anything I don't think there will be much activity in any case. Maybe there isn't a surefire way to increase user input for any of those discussions and the Not Done page is turning into a dusty cabinet lost in the attic or something.. Not what we want.. I think we should just leave it as it is.

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 03:16, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Change the colour of Template:Welcome

Not done

I think it's time for a change. The reason we chose this specific colour was because it was the colour of the navigation bar. Now it's changed.
banana439monkey (Talk | Contribs | Scratch | Edits (1,960)) 12:20, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Support.
Purplewolves (talk | contribs) 03:48, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

The color was made to match the navigation bar? Huh! I never knew that!

Semi-support in that case, I guess. On the pros side, it'll match the header; on the cons side, it may look a little more foreboding - to me, the header purple is an "angry" purple, while the Scratch blue is a "welcoming" blue.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  08:48, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

I never new that as well, but i agree with ken

asqwde talk | contribs 12:08, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Not Done

Not done

I know someone already brought it up...
Anyways, Not Done is not getting any attention. I know that Kenny2scratch already added “Things To Do” on the left sidebar, and the TOC of Not Done, yet no one seems to notice it. I think that we should release an announcement to all existing editors about ND, and all incoming users about ND on their welcome page. In fact, I’m going to add that to my welcome right now.
Any thoughts?
NYCDOT [ Talk Page | Contributions | Directory ] 23:53, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Nice idea, support!

asqwde talk | contribs 12:06, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks!
NYCDOT [ Talk Page | Contributions | Directory ] 15:15, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Support, I think that is a great idea.
Purplewolves (talk | contribs) 20:32, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for support!
NYCDOT [ Talk Page | Contributions | Directory ] 22:15, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

No worries.
Purplewolves (talk | contribs) 22:53, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Support better way to mark not done. Should the TOC on the CP mark out all the not done discussions in a different text color, or something like that? One idea

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 03:45, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ Perhaps make all of the Not Done topics have bold titles? That should attract attention to them for those who browse the TOC.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  03:47, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Maybe what we could do is put the Not Done Topics in Red in the TOC of the CP, the done topics Green in the TOC of the CP, and the in progress discussions the blue color it currently is.
NYCDOT [ Talk Page | Contributions | Directory ] 12:47, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

I agree with KrIsMa, Kenny2scratch, and NYCDOT on having some way to show which topics are done and which are not done, but how would we make topics show as a different color in the table of contents?
bigpuppy talk | contribs 15:31, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

That...is a really good question. I have no idea. I really don't.
NYCDOT [ Talk Page | Contributions | Directory ] 19:22, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Scratch News + Wiki News

Hello. As you know we have the scratch news. How about splitting that up into scratch news and wiki news featuring both on the front page.

Benefits

• Easy to distinguish between any news in scratch and the wiki
• Will encourage more news ideas to be displayed

Things to feature in scratch news

• New FPC
• New announcement in the announcement forum
• New changes to the website
• New SDS

Things to feature in wiki news

• Compliment Tuesday
• Wiki Wednesday
• Important updates
• Important posts in CP
• Elections

Thoughts?

asqwde talk | contribs 16:58, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

I think that is a good idea, it would be a good way to distinguish between different news, and I believe more relevant to different subjects. Any other thoughts?
Purplewolves (talk | contribs) 07:31, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

(changed your strange diamonds to real bullets, the diamonds didn't act like real lists; also for some reason the colons after the mini-headers acted like indents so I changed it to nonindexed headers)

I think that's a great idea! My only concern is that a new box on the homepage would clutter things up, so I think one of the boxes currently on there should be removed. I recommend removing Featured Images, since we always forget to update them - but what are your thoughts?
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  09:19, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Ok thanks for changing it. I agree about removing featured images, support

asqwde talk | contribs 11:37, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

I agree with asqwde, as you mentioned, you always forget to change them; and it is not as important as featured articles.
Purplewolves (talk | contribs) 20:35, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Semi-Support! The front page greets all scrathers come to the wiki, and do not need to know about wiki news. So how about we put the wiki news somewere the editors will see it most often such as the Community Portal, so scratchers can see the scratch news w/out seeing the wiki news.
Jakel181 (talk | contribs) 14:53, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

I agree with Jakel181 in this case. Since the Scratch Wiki news would mainly be for Scratch Wiki editors, we could put it in the CP (as Jakel181 said). Since this is a wiki about Scratch, the Scratch news would stay on the front page.

On the other hand, I disagree with removing the "Featured Images" section. If we don't remember to change them, why delete the section? Why not just try very hard to remember to change them? We could change them every...two weeks? Month? But I think it'd be good to have an interval. Or do we already have an interval? I'm not sure. Either way, I think we should keep this section of the front page. We could do something similar to how Wiki Wednesday used to be done. Actually, Featured Images was done in this way a while ago. There are two sections in the 88^th archive of the CP that are topics where people suggested featured images.

However we'd do it, I hope everyone considers the option of keeping featured images. I think putting images on the front page is good. In most cases, images are good (in my opinion). In fact, images are recommended for Wiki Wednesday articles!

Thanks for reading this.
bigpuppy talk | contribs 15:47, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ I think having Wiki news somewhere other than the front page is also a good idea. I'm not sure about having it on the CP, though, since it counts as a talk page and WM wouldn't like people adding news items with no signatures ;)

Instead, why not have it on the projectspace side of the CP, Scratch Wiki:Community Portal? Notice the lack of "talk" in that title. That would give the non-talk side of the CP some more purpose in life besides just documenting the CP.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  03:58, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Bigpuppy, i agree with what you are saying. i also think it is not a good idea to have it on the CP. I agree with ken about having it on Scratch Wiki:Community Portal

asqwde talk | contribs 11:49, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Yes that sounds good and I've been sugguesting the featured images to be changed mothly around every WW.
Jakel181 (talk | contribs) 13:30, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

@Kenny2scratch - I suppose having it on Scratch Wiki:Community Portal could be good. On the WikiMonitor thing, though: if it was a template (outside of talk) would WikiMonitor still count it as people not signing their posts?
bigpuppy talk | contribs 18:51, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Good point! But then again, the talk side could simply transclude the non-talk side ;)
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  02:58, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

I suppose it could.
bigpuppy talk | contribs 22:27, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Let's change EW stuff moar

Okay, so let's combine my idea, and Ken's idea. The first part of the idea, Ken's idea. It's to completely obliterate the EW group altogether.

• It's no longer necessary.
  • It was created as a placeholder for the inactive ST. We've transferred to Martin's server. All the other wikis, also hosted by Martin do not have this role. From the Scratch Team's perspective (ST = Martin), EW = Admin and Admin = Bureaucrat.

The second part of the idea, my idea. To use the same way for elections.

• Admins are elected, as opposed to EWs
• Bureaucrats are appointed, as opposed to admins.

Thoughts?
banana439monkey (Talk | Contribs | Scratch | Edits (1,960)) 20:46, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

I don’t agree with the first bit. EW is a way to gain trust in users and is useful for that reason. In my opinion, the EW role should be kept.
нεllσυηιcσяηs2 (тαlк║cσηтяιвs║ρяσғιlε) 20:51, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

But no other wiki has it. The ST added that to make up for their inactivity.
banana439monkey (Talk | Contribs | Scratch | Edits (1,960)) 20:53, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

I don't agree with it either, I think it is important to have something in the middle. I personally think it is fine the way it is.
Purplewolves (talk | contribs) 21:07, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

That's actually incorrect. Back in June 2013, when the Scratch 2.0 account request system was first being implemented, scmb1 created the role so that we'd have people to be able to handle the account requests we were about to get.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 21:10, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Really? Well that also adds to my point. Also, on wikis I have been on, they most likely would have a role like EW, even if not called it (Most likely called a Moderator), to me, I have always thought that "EW" was just like a moderator role on any other wiki. (Pointing at "But no other wiki has it.")
Purplewolves (talk | contribs) 21:26, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘These changes were going to be part of the plan, but Ken didn't implement them. I don't like to intervene in a discussion where I am may seem biased (i.e. I support this change in order to gain a "promotion"), but there seems to be some misinformation about what exactly EWs are (go look at the roles & rights lists please). There are certainly some role differences between EWs and Administrators, but these actually have to do more with moderation (i.e. EWs cannot "undelete a page" or revise edit logs). It is my understanding that anyone with FTP access (and therefore handling the technical aspects of the wiki) is a Bureaucrat. So the differences are not substantial and actually have more to do with "moderation" than anything else. I don't really like to call it that since we don't really do that much "moderating", its mostly what I would term "maintence" of the wiki community.
Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs) 21:54, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

I'd consider this topic a duplicate of mine, by the way, but I'll consider that one inactive to the point of doneness.

I'm also not so sure about removing EW anymore. Recently MTBH and I were deciding who would be the new ruwiki admins. One of the admins I'm not so sure is fit for the tools - they are definitely fit for the position, but I'm not sure whether they can figure out how the admin tools work quickly enough; I'd much rather give them EW if it existed on the ruwiki.

On this wiki, the original purpose for EWs is now basically moot. We now have our own bureaucrats; the CA extension was originally designed to have requests confirmed by bureaucrats. So we no longer need EWs explicitly for confirming account requests.

However, EW is also a nice in-between normal user and admin - i.e., we trust this user enough to give them permissions like deleting and patrolling pages, rollbacking edits, moving files, and applying arbitrary tags, but we don't trust them enough to give them permissions like protecting pages, deleting revision history or log entries, editing other people's CSS/JS, editing the user interface (i.e. editing pages in the MediaWiki: namespace), importing pages, moving root userpages or category pages, and having higher API limits. (This list was made with heavy reference to Special:ListGroupRights.)

I don't really support removing EW anymore. I do think that we should promote some of our current EWs to admin (especially long-standing ones like Hamish or Galla), but EWs are here to stay.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  00:19, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Then maybe we could turn EW into admin, and then carry the highly administrative things (protecting, etc) up to bureaucrat.
banana439monkey (Talk | Contribs | Scratch | Edits (1,960)) 08:16, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

I think the discussion before was on the second-last paragraph in S:EW. By having the duty of "maintaining the wiki" surely them being able to do "simple tasks" like 'updating the news' should also include 'deleting pages' (btw even more simple than updating news). Deleting pages isn't a hard thing to do or learn, so is protecting of pages. You just need a strong support system with them (through chat... user pages...) to get them along the first few days of them being EW.

I support better allocation of rights for EW but not the deletion of the EW role.

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 03:39, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

I don't support the deletion of the EW role.

As already stated before, the EW role is a transition period between Wikian and Sysop, and is useful because it allows people to learn the do's and don't's (yes double apostrophes exist now) of Administrator privileges. EW also allows Bureaucrats and Administrators to figure out which users are the most helpful and useful to the community, so as to prove they can be trusted with higher privileges.
Drunken Sailor [ Talk | Contribs | More... ] 20:17, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

(just noting: you say that no other mtwoll-hosted wikis have the EW, but that's incorrect - the dewiki also has EW.)
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  04:00, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Page restoration

I noticed a page was a little messed up. I went ahead and recreated a mockup of the page and placed it in my sandbox. Thoughts on the mockup?
Original: Scratch Wiki:Block Plugin Bugs
Mockup: User:Banana439monkey/sandbox

Do we think I'm ready to push to that page?
banana439monkey (Talk | Contribs | Scratch | Edits (1,960)) 05:41, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Wiki Wednesday protection

Done

Hi there! Can an admin please protect the current Wiki Wednesday article (Animated GIF)? Thanks
bigpuppy talk | contribs 19:19, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Done
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  03:54, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you!
bigpuppy talk | contribs 18:46, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Adding Template:Blocked

Done
On the Scratch Wiki, there are a lot of blocked users. There is currently no template to show that they are blocked. Doing this has a number of advantages:

1. Showing that the user is blocked if they have not written that on their page
2. Having all the statistics right on the userpage
3. On the blocked use list, you can't access the username of the users, so this template allows you to know the username of the blocked user
4. Having a formal system of blocked user information

Should we create this template, or is it okay to go with the block list and user statements?
CrazyBoy826 (talk | contribs) 20:30, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Doing this has a number of disadvantages:

1. The Scratch Team can have a reason to disallow linking to us, rendering us as unmoderated.
2. Scratch doesn't do it.
3. Special:BlockList was removed from our view for a reason. The user list displaying blocked users is bad enough.
   banana439monkey (Talk | Contribs | Scratch | Edits (1,960)) 20:40, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

No, this is not allowed at all. This template purposely does not exist, simply because WE DO NOT PUBLICISE OUR BLOCKS. If a user is blocked, it stays between them and the blockee. This template will just cause drama.
Drunken Sailor [ Talk | Contribs | More... ] 20:58, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Template:Blocked user was deleted a long time ago. Reasons are mentioned above ^.

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 23:26, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Rejected. Blocks are kept as quiet as possible. We are not Wikipedia.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  03:51, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Adding a protection extension

I'm unsure of the name, but Wikipedia has a symbol to signify a page has been protected when reading the page, and its level. The image looks like a padlock. Possibly we could add that extension here, since it may just be useful for seeing protection levels when viewing pages?
banana439monkey (Talk | Contribs | Scratch | Edits (1,960)) 12:26, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

It's not an extension, it's actually a template using a built-in MW feature. The {{featured}} template uses the same feature. We don't need to signify that a page has been protected, though - when you open the pencil menu, it either says "edit" or "view source", which makes it pretty clear whether you can edit it.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  12:39, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

But then that means nothing if it's edit source and it's protected.
banana439monkey (Talk | Contribs | Scratch | Edits (1,960)) 16:01, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

British VS American English

What English should we use on the wiki?

asqwde talk | contribs 15:07, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

I don't know, but I'd suggest using whichever one you'd use outside of of wiki. But on thw whole, American English is a good idea as Scratch is based in America after all.
Redglitter ~ (Talk Page ~ Contributions) ~ 15:15, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

When adding a part, use either form. However, because the primary language is English (US), please do not edit pages changing English (US) to English (UK). Vice versa is acceptable.
banana439monkey (Talk | Contribs | Scratch | Edits (1,960)) 16:29, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

According to Scratch Wiki:Editing Conventions, use American English when creating new articles, as well as for all titles, but if an article with British English was grandfathered in then stay consistent with the article.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  03:26, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

A better system of replying

Okay, so right now, the only way of replying is using indents. That's a basic form of replying, but it is so difficult to see which message you are replying to. The other way is by removing indents, but it makes the indenting look ugly. This new idea introduces a template called indent. It indents the message, like outdent, making indenting more beautiful and easier to read.
banana439monkey (Talk | Contribs | Scratch | Edits (1,960)) 15:56, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Support!
Jakel181 (talk | contribs) 20:34, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

I strongly disagree. Though it may look better, in the source code it won't. Which looks more appealing to the eye? This?

Message
:Reply
::Reply to reply

Or this?

Message
{{indent}}Reply
{{indent}}{{indent}}Reply to reply

Or this, if we're smart about it?

Message
{{indent}}Reply
{{indent|2}}Reply to reply

The first way is way more concise. Besides, using a template means proposing a change like the Wiki has never seen since the transfer, and for the sole reason of making things look "more beautiful" when even the beauty is 美中不足!

Unless you can think of a supreme technical reason to make this change that I can't refute, I remain strongly opposed to this idea.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  03:41, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi all! It's been a while since I've been on here, just popping in! What I am a little confused about is how the template would make it more clear who you are replying to. Could you elaborate on that a bit? Thanks banana!
03:57, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

I guess that system in the source code is ugly, but it's ugly the way you do it right now.
banana439monkey (Talk | Contribs | Scratch | Edits (1,960)) 08:04, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

I find the current system perfectly pleasing to the eye, in both source and parsed.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  08:12, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Then possibly we could enforce that system?
banana439monkey (Talk | Contribs | Scratch | Edits (1,960)) 18:31, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Compliment Tuesday! June 26th 2018

Welcome to the Fourth Compliment Tuesday! June 26th 2018.

What is Compliment Tuesday?

Compliment Tuesday is a way of showing appreciation to other Wikians. Feel free to congratulate someone for finishing a large page, or even just give minor thanks for a minor edit. Just remember to keep everything positive!

How to Compliment

We have a whole wiki page on it! You can find it here: Compliment Tuesday

Compliments

The Compliments are *drum roll please*

NYCDOT (talk | contribs)	Thanks for being such an active Scratch Wiki editor, and thanks for your edits! bigpuppy talk | contribs 20:37, 15 June 2018 (UTC) Thanks for helping out in general! You do some of the work I'd consider gruel work :P  kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  08:51, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
Drunken_Sailor (talk | contribs)	Thanks for your mainspace edits and thoughtful responses in the Community Portal! bigpuppy talk | contribs 20:37, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs)	Thanks for designing the Wiki Wednesday posts; you're great at making them! bigpuppy talk | contribs 20:37, 15 June 2018 (UTC) You’re a very understanding and thoughtful person and are so helpful to others нεllσυηιcσяηs2 (тαlк║cσηтяιвs║ρяσғιlε) 06:38, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
LiFaytheGoblin (talk | contribs)	Thanks for posting the Wiki Wednesday posts; Wiki Wednesday is amazing! bigpuppy talk | contribs 20:37, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
Kenny2scratch (talk | contribs)	You are an AMAZING Scratch Wiki editor; I can tell how much you care about the Scratch Wiki from how much time and effort you put into it! bigpuppy talk | contribs 20:37, 15 June 2018 (UTC) You are the best and most active editor on this wiki. You’re so dedicated and care about the wiki so much. нεllσυηιcσяηs2 (тαlк║cσηтяιвs║ρяσғιlε) 06:38, 21 June 2018 (UTC) Thanks for being so active and helping out so much! KJRYoshi07 (My Talk) (Contribs) KJRYoshi07 10:28, 21 June 2018 (UTC) Thanks for your help on the wiki, during the transfer and on the interwikis. banana439monkey (Talk | Contribs | Scratch | Edits (1,960)) 09:02, 24 June 2018 (UTC) Thanks for teaching me how to Archive. That Really helps. 12:34, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
KJRYoshi07 (talk | contribs)	Thanks for being awesome and thinking of Slatch Siggy NYCDOT [ Talk Page | Contributions | Directory ] 00:03, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
Bigpuppy (talk | contribs)	Thank you for being the most active EW besides yours truly! You're also very friendly when dealing with account requests, more friendly than I sometimes can be.  kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  05:20, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
CrazyBoy826 (talk | contribs)	Thank you for making all of those helpful redirects! Although we've had our frictions, and some redirects had to be deleted, I still admire how much thought you put into where people might look for information, and how to redirect them to existing information.  kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  05:20, 16 June 2018 (UTC) Thanks for being such an active Scratch Wiki editor! bigpuppy talk | contribs 16:31, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
jvvg (talk | contribs)	Thank you for being a great EW/Admin. You were very great when trasfering the domains. NYCDOT [ Talk Page | Contributions | Directory ] 16:51, 19 June 2018 (UTC) Thank you for dedicating so much time of your life to the Wiki! I find it difficult to believe that you're in college (or right now in a job I guess) and still find time to edit.  kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  08:51, 20 June 2018 (UTC) Eventhough you’re 20 and have job now you still help out on the wiki. I find you and amazing smart person and you are so helpful and polite to other wikians. нεllσυηιcσяηs2 (тαlк║cσηтяιвs║ρяσғιlε) 06:38, 21 June 2018 (UTC) Thank you for everything you've done for us. bigpuppy talk | contribs 16:31, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
Jakel181 (talk | contribs)	Thank you again for helping to revive Compliment Tuesday! You're almost literally making the Wiki a better place  kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  08:51, 20 June 2018 (UTC) Thank you for doing so much for Compliment Tuesday, and the Scratch Wiki in general! bigpuppy talk | contribs 16:31, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
Hellounicorns2 (talk | contribs)	Thank you for being an active Wikian and for being very helpful on this wiki! bigpuppy talk | contribs 16:20, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
MartinWollenweber (talk | contribs)	Thank you for hosting the international Scratch Wikis! Although you rarely appear on this wiki, your every edit is still much appreciated. You provide all of the financial support we need, and you additionally deal with the hosting provider for us. Thank you!  kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  09:01, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
Kurankuran (talk | contribs)	You're a great Wikian, in both English and Japanese! Apple502j Talk/Activities 1,690edit 10:57, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
ErnieParke (talk | contribs)	You're an amazing person. Friendly, and helpful. You've helped the wiki transfer and have just been so friendly. banana439monkey (Talk | Contribs | Scratch | Edits (1,960)) 11:10, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
Apple502j (talk | contribs)	Thanks for helping me at the wiki. You're such a helpful person! Dilek10 (talk | contribs) 22:12, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

The next CT is July 3rd 2018! See You then!

“

There are many more people on this wiki who deserve these comments just as much as those who received them. :) Everyone is special and brings there own ideas. The more of us there are, the better the community spirit. Sadly, I must sign off now- Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs) 01:06, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

”

Jakel181 (talk | contribs) 12:54, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Nice!
Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs) 14:38, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Glad to see so many compliments!

asqwde talk | contribs 16:59, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Not Done Why is this in the archives??
Jakel181 (talk | contribs) 14:59, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

I moved it to CP
Apple502j Talk/Activities 1,690edit 06:23, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Because of previous topics I assumed that all CT topics were {{done}} as soon as they were posted. I now know otherwise.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  06:26, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks
Jakel181 (talk | contribs) 16:35, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ The next CT has come out so now this is done
нεllσυηιcσяηs2 (тαlк║cσηтяιвs║ρяσғιlε) 21:46, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Forum Topics

Hi guys! I have a question about the forum topics. Should we change the dates of when it first opened to the dates of the first topic? Or is that already done? Also, should we include the first forum topic of each forum?
NYCDOT [ Talk Page | Contributions | Directory ] 21:55, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

I disagree, but even if I did, how do you intend to find the first created thread in a subforum, given that they will get bumped around a bit?
Jokebookservice1 (talk | contribs) 00:12, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

I wasn't saying that we must add it. It was just a thought.
NYCDOT [ Talk Page | Contributions | Directory ] 00:45, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Huh? What are you talking about?
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  02:55, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

I'd appreciate it if you would take time to read what I wrote on top
What I am trying to say is that for the forum pages, should we add the exact dates of the official opening, if we know it? And should we include the first forum topic of each forum?
NYCDOT [ Talk Page | Contributions | Directory ] 13:01, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

If I hadn't read what you said, I wouldn't have replied. I said "what are you talking about" because I didn't understand what you wrote on top.

I think the exact date created is too easy to get wrong and too hard to get write to merit inclusion in forum pages. The forum could have been open for days before anybody noticed it.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  13:02, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Yes, that is true that the exact date is very hard to get, even harder that the original guys (Lucario, JSO, Veggieman001, etc.) are gone. Do we think we could get the month from a ST member? And maybe even the first topic?
NYCDOT [ Talk Page | Contributions | Directory ] 13:06, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Compliment Tuesday! July 3rd, 2018

Welcome to the Fifth Compliment Tuesday! July 3^rd, 2018.

What is Compliment Tuesday?

Compliment Tuesday is a way of showing appreciation to other Wikians. Feel free to congratulate someone for finishing a large page, or even just give minor thanks for a minor edit. Just remember to keep everything positive!

How to Compliment

We have a whole wiki page on it! You can find it here: Compliment Tuesday

Compliments

The Compliments are *drum roll please*

kenny2scratch (talk | contribs)	Being very active on the wiki. asqwde talk | contribs 17:10, 27 June 2018 (UTC) Again, thank you so much for all you have done for us. You're awesome! bigpuppy talk | contribs 19:13, 27 June 2018 (UTC) Thanks for posting the CT post this week while I'm gone. You are a big help! :D Jakel181 (talk | contribs) 15:05, 28 June 2018 (UTC) Thank you for fixing the {{note}} template! bigpuppy talk | contribs 15:25, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs)	Being so thoutful and polite on the wiki. asqwde talk | contribs 17:10, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
jvvg (talk | contribs)	For running wikimonitor. asqwde talk | contribs 17:10, 27 June 2018 (UTC) Thanks for everything you've done for the wiki! bigpuppy talk | contribs 19:13, 27 June 2018 (UTC) Thanks for being such an amazingly skilled wikian PLUS running an incredible bot! Redglitter ~ (Talk Page ~ Contributions) ~ 15:17, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
bigpuppy (talk | contribs)	Being so kind and making so many compliments. asqwde talk | contribs 17:10, 27 June 2018 (UTC) Thank you for giving compliments to so many people! You help cheer us all up.  kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  03:23, 28 June 2018 (UTC) For making my day нεllσυηιcσяηs2 (тαlк║cσηтяιвs║ρяσғιlε) 06:17, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
ErnieParke (talk | contribs)	For running the amazing Interwiki bot. asqwde talk | contribs 17:10, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
Asqwde (talk | contribs)	Thanks for being a frequent and constructive poster on the Community Portal! bigpuppy talk | contribs 18:50, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
CrazyBoy826 (talk | contribs)	Thanks for fixing {{note}}! bigpuppy talk | contribs 19:13, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
Hellounicorns2 (talk | contribs)	Thank you for being so active here and being a great, thoughtful, constructive, awesome, and dedicated wiki editor! bigpuppy talk | contribs 19:13, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
jakel181 (talk | contribs)	Thank you for running Compliment Tuesday when everyone else had other things to do!  kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  03:23, 28 June 2018 (UTC) Thanks for running CT! asqwde talk | contribs 15:11, 29 June 2018 (UTC) When you started up Compliment Tuesday up again, it was like the Wiki just got 10x brighter mentally and literally. NYCDOT [ Talk Page | Contributions | Directory ] 15:29, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

The next CT is July 10^th, 2018! See you then!
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  07:50, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Note: I'm taking over CT while jakel181 is away, he'll be back for the next CT.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  07:52, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

YAY!

asqwde talk | contribs 11:39, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Great!!
bigpuppy talk | contribs 21:55, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Done
Jakel181 (talk | contribs) 12:20, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Scratcharchiveasun

So, I've been surfing through the Wiki, and noticed a lot of the references are from this, a website devoted for the archives of the 1.x forums. Does anyone know who discovered this website, and who Andrew Sun is? (He seems to be website creator)
NYCDOT [ Talk Page | Contributions | Directory ] 00:24, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

When the Scratch website migrated to 2.0, one of the things that wasn't transferred over was the old forums. The ST kept an archive of the forums at archive.scratch.mit.edu for a while, but then they decided that they didn't want to waste resources on it. Blob8108 asked them if he could take over the archive, so they gave the data to him and he hosted it on scratchforums.blob8108.com for another while, but then the cost of hosting it became too much and he asked for someone to take over the archives. Andrew Sun, better known as comp09, volunteered and put the archives on the current domain.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  03:54, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Ok, thanks!
NYCDOT [ Talk Page | Contributions | Directory ] 11:57, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Done
Apple502j Talk/Activities 1,690edit 04:30, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Remove the {{Protect}} Template?

The protect template is unused now. What users normally do is comment on a sysop's talk page asking for a protect. Should we remove it?
CrazyBoy826 | Talk | Contribs | Scratch account | More... 16:28, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Actually, we should use this template rather than posting to an admin's talk, because with the template all admins can check it.
Apple502j Talk/Activities 1,690edit 04:30, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

I disagree, we should not remove it. And i actually used it a couple of days ago.

asqwde talk | contribs 06:03, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

The protect template has its uses, though it isn't used much. I'll treat this as Done by rejection.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  06:16, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Minor change to {{open userpage}}

There have been a few cases where users have added {{open userpage}} to others' userpages without permission. To prevent this from happening in the future, I have added a rule to the abuse filter where you cannot add or remove the template from others' userpages. I have also updated the warning message to make it more obvious to a user why their edit is not allowed.
jvvg (talk | contribs) 20:19, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Awesome! Sounds good!
bigpuppy talk | contribs 21:57, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Cool!

asqwde talk | contribs 13:38, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Wiki Server not available?

Hi everyone! Recently I've been getting errors when trying to access the Scratch Wikis (any, really). It will tell me that the page was not found or not available and when I try a few minutes later, it will work again. Does someone else encounter this problem? Else I'll see if this is a problem with my router (since it occured on different computers at home). -
LiFaytheGoblin (talk | contribs) 07:42, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

We all get resource limit reached.
banana439monkey (Talk | Contribs | Scratch | Edits (1,960)) 07:44, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

It seems to be a combination of rate limiting by the server provider for the server itself, as well as rate limiting by the server for its users; the rates are set low, so there are HTTP errors.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  07:51, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

I got rate limiting three times: using HotCat too quickly. I couldn't even see this wiki for a whole day.
Apple502j Talk/Activities 1,690edit 07:54, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

I've never seen this problem, but sometimes links open in new windows.
CrazyBoy826 | Talk | Contribs | Scratch account | More... 16:10, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Links opening in new windows has nothing to do with server problems; it just means either you're holding Ctrl while clicking them or the links are meant to be opened in a new window.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  12:35, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

@Crazy @Ken Or middle clicking a link.
banana439monkey (Talk | Contribs | Scratch | Edits (1,960)) 18:00, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ I'm on a laptop so I don't middle-click.
CrazyBoy826 | Talk | Contribs | Scratch account | More... 16:45, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Protected page edit

Hi, can a EW Plus edit the page Animated GIF and replace it with the contents here I fixed it according to S:STYLE

asqwde talk | contribs 09:45, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

No. That's too minor an edit to need a protected edit.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  09:52, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

What difference does it make whether it is minor or not?

asqwde talk | contribs 11:41, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

The difference is that the edit isn't actually needed - it's completely fine without it.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  13:27, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

I guess this means the edit should be postponed until the article isn't featured anymore? -
LiFaytheGoblin (talk | contribs) 10:22, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

Ken is on a trip

“	Tomorrow, I'm leaving for Germany to visit Martin. I'll be there from tomorrow until the 5th of August. While I'm there, I will be in the German timezone - so if you have anything you need me to do, it's best to keep in mind that I'm not in the HK timezone. Also, I'll have whatever command-line access to the Wiki that I request - i.e. I will have SSH access to the Wiki servers. So if there's something server-side that needs doing, I can probably do it faster than the other admins while I'm there, since I'll have command-line access instead of plain FTP.	”
– Yesterday at 9:12 PM, Ken on Discord

Apple502j Talk/Activities 1,690edit 23:16, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

Compliment Tuesday! July 10th 2018

Welcome to the Sixth Compliment Tuesday! July 10th 2018.

What is Compliment Tuesday?

Compliment Tuesday is a way of showing appreciation to other Wikians. Feel free to congratulate someone for finishing a large page, or even just give minor thanks for a minor edit. Just remember to keep everything positive!

How to Compliment

We have a whole wiki page on it! You can find it here: Compliment Tuesday

Compliments

The Compliments are *drum roll please*

User	Compliments
Bigpuppy (talk | contribs)	Thanks for being an active and helpful Wiki editor! CrazyBoy826 | Talk | Contribs | Scratch account | More... 19:03, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
Asqwde (talk | contribs)	Thank you for making such helpful contributions and making sure everything is in good, working order NYCDOT [ Talk Page | Contributions | Directory ] 21:13, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

“

There are many more people on this wiki who deserve these comments just as much as those who received them. :) Everyone is special and brings there own ideas. The more of us there are, the better the community spirit. Sadly, I must sign off now- Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs) 01:06, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

”

The next CT is July 17th 2018! See you then!

Jakel181 (talk | contribs) 12:26, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Not done
Jakel181 (talk | contribs) 12:28, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

@Jakel, fixed your post
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  17:33, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Done

Adding Template:Good Guidelines

I think we need a template for pages that would usually break the Wiki Guidelines but have exceptions made for them. It would look like this:

This article or section has content that would usually break the Wiki Guidelines. However, an exception has been made for it because .

Source code: {{Header Template |[[File:Yes check.png|25px]] |This article or section has content that would usually break the [[Scratch Wiki:Guidelines|Wiki Guidelines]]. However, an exception has been made for it because {{{1|}}}.} Example pages:
Kaj
Removed Pac-Man Project
Scratch in the Media/SpaceX Falcon 9 Lander
Should we create this template?
CrazyBoy826 | Talk | Contribs | Scratch account | More... 16:09, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Already have something like it.
NYCDOT [ Talk Page | Contributions | Directory ] 16:47, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

I think such exceptions are rare enough that it's OK to re-create it on every exceptional page.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  17:31, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

@NYCDOT: What do you mean by "Already have something like it"?
CrazyBoy826 | Talk | Contribs | Scratch account | More... 16:24, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

UPDATE TO MY LAST EDIT: I notified NYCDOT on their talk page. He/she said that we could just use Header Template.
CrazyBoy826 | Talk | Contribs | Scratch account | More... 16:13, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Done?
CrazyBoy826 | Talk | Contribs | Scratch account | More... 16:13, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Category:Pages with too many expensive parser function calls

I don't know why Category:Pages with too many expensive parser function calls is there. Should we delete it?
CrazyBoy826 | Talk | Contribs | Scratch account | More... 16:25, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Same, i think it should be deleted.

asqwde talk | contribs 16:42, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

No! It's a system category that, as the name suggests, contains pages with too many expensive parser function calls (expensive means it uses a lot of resources to call). It should ideally be empty, but is unfortunately usually not.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  16:58, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Done yeah it shouldn't be deleted by above

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 11:57, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

References Forum Topic

We all want the wiki to be as accurate and trustworthy as possible. A way we can make it trustworthy is by adding references. But some articles haven't got enough references and finding references is hard work. References need to be:

• Accurate
• Trustworthy
• Reliable

That's a lot of work to get a good reference. Help:References provides more info on references. It's hard for several people to get all the references when you look at how many pages link to Citation needed there are a lot of pages!

I suggest we make a forum topic, that says all / most of the pages that need references and get the help of scratchers. We can tell them what makes a good reference and ask if anyone can find or get a reference and if they do they can link us to it. Then one of the wiki editors can add it to the page.

I think this is a good idea as it will help make the wiki accurate and trustworthy. What do others think?

asqwde talk | contribs 17:12, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

I think having a post that directly lists the pages will be too hard to maintain. It would be better to instead link to the list of pages transcluding Template:Citation needed on the post. Then anyone can contribute references in posts on that topic. It would also be nice to have the people contribute their references according to the format, so we should link to or quote that.

I do like the idea! It might also be better to have a Wiki admin start the topic (as with the CP topic), but you will definitely be credited.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  07:55, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

I agree with what you have just said. Support!
asqwde talk | contribs 07:58, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Can we start the topic yet?
asqwde talk | contribs 06:10, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

I think we should wait for at least one more supporter, my approval doesn't mean community approval ;)
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  08:50, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Yeah,true
asqwde talk | contribs 14:35, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Support and No Support Templates

There are a lot of ideas posted on the CP and talk pages including:

1. Merging
2. Deletion
3. New ideas for the wiki

I think we should have a template which says whether users support or do not support those ideas. Thoughts?

asqwde talk | contribs 17:27, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

You can just do:

{{done|Support}} and {{not done|No support}}

Support and No support
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  17:29, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Oh thanks for telling me that Done

asqwde talk | contribs 17:30, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

An Idea For Blocks (disambiguation)

Not done

Recently, I created a new disambiguation page at Blocks (disambiguation). My idea is to change Block and Blocks to redirect to the disambig, and the block article to Blocks (programing feature).
Pros

• Easier to find the other pages
• Matches the other disambigs: first it all redirects to the disambig, then diverts to different pages

Cons

• It takes longer to get to the main blocks article

Should we do this?
CrazyBoy826 | Talk | Contribs | Scratch account | More... 18:30, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

No! You missed one huge con: it would break many links and likely require an edit storm. Blocks is also the sixth most-viewed page on the wiki so it would confuse many people who are looking for it. No, definitely no support.

 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  21:04, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

The All Scratch Wikis page

Done I found that de:Scratch-Wiki:Alle Scratch Wikis is broken. Can someone fix it?
CrazyBoy826 | Talk | Contribs | Scratch account | More... 20:31, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

I'll be working on that later. I know exactly why it's broken. Doing...
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  08:02, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Done.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  08:34, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

:'P Template

Emoji template, exists on Scratch. Should we create it?
banana439monkey (Talk | Contribs | Scratch | Edits (1,960)) 20:18, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Go ahead, but don't call it ":'P", that'll be hard to type. Make the title a word of some sort. The Template:E parameter should be :'P though.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  20:19, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Scratch Wiki:Table of Contents

If a user clicks the Website image, the link is broken Can a sysop change it to go to Scratch Wiki:Table of Contents/Front Page?
CrazyBoy826 | Talk | Contribs | Scratch account | More... 17:13, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

I fixed it with a redirect. Done
Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs) 00:45, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Not done The redirect won't meet the capitalization rule!
Apple502j Talk/Activities 1,690edit 06:07, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Fixed and deleted the redirect
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  10:24, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Translating Japanese articles into English

Hello! I'm an admin in Japanese Scratch Wiki. In that wiki, we have some articles that English Wiki doesn't have. (Of course, some can't be, due to the strict S:NOSP!)

• ja:音量を使ってScratchを制御する (Control Scratch via Loudness Block)
• ja:Some Blocks (An early extension of Scratch 3.0, which is removed later.)
• ja:画像のホスト/cubeupload.com (How to Use Cubeupload.com)
• ja:商標の方針 (Trademark Policy)

Please discuss whether they are useful. Thank you!
Apple502j Talk/Activities 1,690edit 22:54, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Cool articles! I definitely think we should add the "Some Blocks" one; since it was a Scratch 3.0 extension just like the pen extension or the music extension, it's just that it was removed.

I think the cubeupload one might work well on the Wiki - or at least as a section in Image Hosting.

I think we could possibly add the Trademark Policy one - after all, we have articles for the Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Community Guidelines.

Could you please explain the first one a bit more? Thank you.

Anyway, thanks for pointing these out - in my opinion most, if not all of them, could be good articles on the English Scratch Wiki as well as the Japanese one!
bigpuppy talk | contribs 14:16, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Change Template:Shortcut

Template:Shortcut's links to the shortcut pages are just [[{{{_}}}]]. Should we change them to {{plain link|https://en.scratch-wiki.info/w/index.php?title={{{_}}&redirect=no|{{{_}}}}}?
CrazyBoy826 | Talk | Contribs | Scratch account | More... 16:30, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

No! The shortcut just shows the redirects, there's no need to break a style guideline just to show the redirect page itself. If you really need to see the page itself, any page that's redirected to will have a link to the redirect page - use that instead.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  17:14, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

A Question about protection

Hi, os i know there is a level of protection for EWplus, but as far as i am aware there is another level of protection so that only registered users can edit that page. But can't unregistered users not edit pages already?
asqwde talk | contribs 06:17, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Have you ever seen an IP address user make an edit? Anything in the recent changes where an IP address is the username? The answer is no. Anonymous editing is disabled here. You must have an account to edit; you must go through the request process to have an account.

The protection levels we have are:

autoconfirmed

Allows only registered users to edit. This is pretty useless, since all editors are registered anyway, but we can't remove it since it's a MediaWiki default level.

sysop

Allows only administrators to edit. This is only used for very high-traffic pages like Scratch Wiki Home.

wikian

Allows only Wikians to edit. A Wikian must have 50 edits and a month-old account. This is used on pages that should be editable by most regular users, but that we don't want new users to mess up.

botplus

Allows only bots, EWs, and administrators to edit. This is used on pages that are automatically updated by a bot but shouldn't be edited by normal users.

EWplus

Allows only EWs and administrators to edit. This is used on pages that shouldn't be edited by normal users but should be edited by EWs, not just admins.

Hope that clears everything up!
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  08:49, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, but if the autoconfirmed has no use, why is Scratch Wiki:Table of Contents/Front Page protected with it?
asqwde talk | contribs 09:49, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out! It's now wikian-protected.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  09:55, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

News Entry

July 16, 2018 — Scratch Camp Make Art

The first week of Scratch Camp has begun. The theme for the first week is Make Art. The description says: For the first week of Scratch Camp, try your hand at art! Sculpture, painting, pen art, or origami, the possibilities never end!
asqwde talk | contribs 11:48, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Done with some edits.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  11:52, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks
asqwde talk | contribs 12:08, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Protection Level

auto-confirmed -> wikian:

• Scratch Wiki:Welcome — completely unprotected instead, no need to protect redirects
• Template:Navbox/doc — unprotected editing, sysop moving
• Scratch Wiki:Table of Contents/Program — Done
• Scratch Wiki:Table of Contents/Tutorials — Done
• Scratch Wiki:Table of Contents/Website — completely unprotected instead, no need to protect redirects
• Scratch Wiki:Table of Contents/Other Tutorials — Done
• Scratch Wiki:Table of Contents/Scratch Program Tutorials — Done
• Scratch Wiki:Table of Contents/Math Tutorials — Done
• Scratch Wiki:Table of Contents/Scripting Tutorials — Done
• Scratch Wiki:Table of Contents/Forums — Done

auto-confirmed -> none:

• Scratch Wiki:April Fools/Help:Protected pages — Done
• User:KrIsMa/Templates - should be protected via AF — Done
• User:Swampert11 also — protected at wikian instead, the original protection was by author request

auto-confirmed -> EWplus:

• Template:Welcome — protected at wikian instead, no reason only EWs can edit it

sysop -> none:

• File:Common script 3.png — Done
• File:Common script 5.png — Done
• File:Common script 12.png It was used on Scratch Blog 1.4, but it doesn't exist now. So it doesn't have to be protected anyway. — Done

sysop -> EWplus or wikian:

• Talk:Scratch Wiki Home - I don't think we have to protect it as main is. Not many see it. — completely unprotected instead, no need to protect a redirect
• Talk:Main Page - same — completely unprotected instead, no need to protect a redirect
• Category:Scratch Wiki — no change, that's the root category

EWplus -> none:

• User:KrIsMa/Common.css — Done
• User:KrIsMa/common.css — Done

EWplus -> sysop:

• Scratch Wiki Home/The Scratch Wiki — no change, no need to prevent EWs

Apple502j Talk/Activities 1,690edit 12:57, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

I've edited your post, marking what I ended up doing (I didn't want to copy it all myself :P)
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  13:47, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Delete Request

• Scratch Wiki:Search Since it was replaced with Special:Search and seems to use an old extension that doesn't work. It's fully-protected.
  Apple502j Talk/Activities 1,690edit 12:57, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Done
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  13:32, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Adding DeleteOwn

The cool thing about this extension is that you can delete pages you authored, which frees EW time, plus probably isn't a huge concern, even for vandals. Most people actually accidentally create pages, then realise oh shoot, why did I make that page. now i've gotta ask an ew to delete it. Instead, they can delete it themself. Thoughts?
banana439monkey (Talk | Contribs | Scratch | Edits (1,960)) 02:09, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Nice! How do we use it?
NYCDOT [ Talk Page | Contributions | Directory ] 02:15, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Um, no, we don't. Deleting your own articles would just be another opening for vandalism - it gives users an extra right to abuse. What if the creator of some major page suddenly decides to delete it?

Deleting test pages isn't that big a hassle either. Just leave it be.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  02:38, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Maybe we could modify the extension to say, if the page has this much traffic, has several edit or/and is linked to, they can't delete it.

What about OCD people?
banana439monkey (Talk | Contribs | Scratch | Edits (1,960)) 03:55, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Then that's no different from just requesting it.

OCD people: they can just request for it to be deleted.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  03:57, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Otherwise they can.

And impatient?
banana439monkey (Talk | Contribs | Scratch | Edits (1,960)) 04:01, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Human processing of requests for deletion allow for much greater account of context - that is, a human will understand what's going on and not just blindly delete it if it meets requirements, whereas an extension will ignore the situation and just go for it.

Patience is a virtue. Learn patience.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  04:06, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

“	Patience is a virtue. Learn patience.	”
– Kenny2scratch

KrIsMa user | talk | contribs | edits 02:32, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Wheres compliment Tuesday?

Hi, it was Tuesday yesterday but there was no compliment Tuesday?!
asqwde talk | contribs 11:49, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

I just contacted Ken about it. If you were on discord...
NYCDOT [ Talk Page | Contributions | Directory ] 12:27, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Done sorry for they delay its up now.
Jakel181 (talk | contribs) 16:33, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Compliment Wednesday! July 18th 2018

Welcome to the First Compliment Wednesday! July 18th 2018.

First I apolgize for not getting th CT on time this week. I had some family vistors come over and that took the whole day up.

What is Compliment Tuesday?

Compliment Tuesday is a way of showing appreciation to other Wikians. Feel free to congratulate someone for finishing a large page, or even just give minor thanks for a minor edit. Just remember to keep everything positive!

How to Compliment

We have a whole wiki page on it! You can find it here: Compliment Tuesday

Compliments

The Compliments are *drum roll please*

User	Compliments
NYCDOT (talk | contribs)	Thanks for being such a helpful and active wiki editor! bigpuppy talk | contribs 21:46, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
DragonLover379 (talk | contribs)	Thanks for all your helpful edits, and for being so active! bigpuppy talk | contribs 15:58, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
Hellodude1231 (talk | contribs)	Your account request was extremely well written, better than many I've seen! Well done, welcome!  kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  16:00, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
Bigpuppy (talk | contribs)	As usual, thank you for complimenting so many people! You and Jakel181 combined make a great positivity team :D  kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  17:21, 12 July 2018 (UTC) Bigpuppy, your contributions are well meaningful and only a true Wiki Contributer could do something like that. Also, thanks for going around telling people that their edits are really good. NYCDOT [ Talk Page | Contributions | Directory ] 19:57, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
Jakel181 (talk | contribs)	Again, thank you for running CT! The Wiki almost seems brighter with your efforts :)  kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  17:21, 12 July 2018 (UTC) Thanks for all the work you put in running CT! asqwde talk | contribs 11:49, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
Apple502j (talk | contribs)	Thank you for adding so many interwikis to pages, and just being a really helpful person in general. You're awesome! bigpuppy talk | contribs 13:02, 15 July 2018 (UTC) Adding so many interwikis asqwde talk | contribs 11:49, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
kenny2scratch (talk | contribs)	Answering so many questions and being active on the wiki asqwde talk | contribs 11:49, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
Dmith (talk | contribs)	Thank you for your help with interwikis, as well! bigpuppy talk | contribs 15:07, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

“

There are many more people on this wiki who deserve these comments just as much as those who received them. :) Everyone is special and brings there own ideas. The more of us there are, the better the community spirit. Sadly, I must sign off now- Makethebrainhappy (talk | contribs) 01:06, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

”

The next CT is July 24th 2018! See you then!

Not done

Jakel181 (talk | contribs) 16:25, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Edited post with permission.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  16:38, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Yay!
asqwde talk | contribs 17:39, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Update TOC Website

You need to update this. Move Newest Projects into removed rows.
NYCDOT [ Talk Page | Contributions | Directory ] 19:39, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Done
asqwde talk | contribs 19:53, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Privacy policy

Our privacy policy links to the German wiki. Should we make one of our own?
banana439monkey (Talk | Contribs | Scratch | Edits (1,960)) 19:07, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

No. The German privacy policy is the legally accurate one. Our disclaimer is a rough (and outdated, now) translation of the German disclaimer.
 kenny2scratch  Talk  Contribs  Directory  22:24, 19 July 2018 (UTC)